In response to the long-standing philosophical question of immorality, many philosophers have posited the soul criterion, which asserts the soul constitutes personal identity and survives physical death. In The Myth of the Soul, Clarence Darrow rejects the existence of the soul in his case against the notion of immortality and an afterlife. His primary argument against the soul criterion is that no good explanation exists for how a soul enters a body, or when its beginning might occur. (Darrow 43) After first explicating Darrow 's view, I will present what I believe is its greatest shortcoming, an inconsistent use of the term soul, and argue that this weakness impacts the overall strength of his argument.
Death by Thomas Nagel tackles the question of death and if it is bad that it is a permanent end to our existence. Nagel states two possible positions in response to this, either death is bad because it deprives us of living life, or it is not bad because even if death is a loss then there is no subject to experience it and therefore the loss of life cannot be felt. In response to the first position Nagel argues that life is valuable in itself even if we strip it of all experience good or bad. He then argues that since a state of nonexistence is not bad by itself, it cannot be what makes death bad. He argues for this position by stating that we do not see the period before we are born as bad so why would nonexistence after life be bad? Nagel
Human life is relatively essential especially when individuals make their lives productive by finding the real purpose of living. Several scholars and philosopher have attempted to explain the meaning of life, while on the other hand, others have come up with arguments to justify or explain death. Thus, this essay will seek to explain the meaning of life and also attempt to answer the question as to whether death is bad using ideologies from two scholars: Susan Wolf and Thomas Nagel.
Human dilemmas no doubt are as old as human nature because human beings are eternally entrapped in situations wherein subjective feelings and objective conditions mismatch. The predicament of man in the impersonal and formal universe evidences continuous struggle for search of meaning, which again has lost its absolutist character in postmodernist times on account of its fluidity. As such, the whole point of constructing identity in an essentialist manner seems untenable today. The liberal humanist seeking for a truer/nobler self, or identity in the conventional sense which has always remained definable and determinable, scarcely holds any ground. The proposed thesis has an explicit diasporic slant to work out how identities of various characters
Existentialism is a cultural movement that flourished in Europe in the 1940s and 1950s. It may be defined as the philosophical theory which holds that a further set of categories, governed by the norm of authenticity, is necessary to grasp human existence. To approach existentialism in this categorical way may seem to conceal what is often taken to be its “heart” (Kaufmann, 1968), namely, its character as a gesture of protest against academic philosophy, its anti-system sensibility, its flight from the “iron cage” of reason (Crowell, 2004). Existentialism has many different themes, one of which is Freedom and Choice.
Death is an inevitable topic that at some point in time everyone will experience. Some people spend their lifetime worrying about death and dying, and others rely on their faith and relish in the thought that after fulfilling their life on Earth, they will live eternally in Heaven. Neither Epicurus nor Feldman believe in life after death, but this is where their similarities end, as Epicurus regards that even without an afterlife, death is not something we should worry about, whereas Feldman is concerned with the harm death brings upon us.
Olberding brings to light the oppositional points of view of eastern and western philosophies about death. Firstly eastern philosophy on death revolves around the problem of other people dying. Differentiating directly with western philosophy on death because western philosophy focuses on the problem of your own death. With both ideologies in mind Dr. Olberding argues that it is equally important to find the best way to respond to personal mortality and to the death of others. With personal mortality, being a westerner herself, Dr. Olberding claims that philosophy is a formidable strategy for assuaging ones fear of their own inevitable death and mortality. She claims this because philosophy defines what death is and rationalizes the anxieties brought on by awareness of personal mortality. Eastern philosophy focuses on the problem dealing with the loss of others, which everyone who lives a life in companionship with others will feel, at some point in their life. Dr. Olberding states that the problem of death is actually the problem of loss. In her essay she uses the traditions of both Confucius and Zhuangzi and their reflections on the death of others. By meticulously researching both sides of western and eastern philosophies on death Dr. Olberding concludes that finding the best way to cope with individual mortality and mortality of others are equally important to a person on an emotional, psychological, and philosophical level. She concludes this because both affect
This understanding is said to be first disclosed to human beings through their practical encounters with things and other people, as well as through language. Therefore, for Heidegger being is shown to be intimately linked with temporality; the relationship between them is investigated by means of an analysis of human existence. He has raised explicitly the question concerning the “sense of being,” and believes that the crisis of Western civilization has traces in that everyone has “forgetfulness of being.” For Heidegger being is surrounded on all sides by nothingness, like a ball suspended in a void. So every being is said to be surrounded by little “pockets” of nothingness; in other words, nothingness is within being, for example, distance. (pp. 54–55) Thus, Heidegger argued that nothing is what shapes being generally. This reveals the most fundamental, transcendent reality, beyond all notions of what-is slipping over into what-is-not. Even in the historical tradition, according to Heidegger, nothing is shown to be the concomitant rather than the opposite of
Thomas Nagel’s “Death” has a central theme that is addressed. Nagel explores the idea that if death is a lasting and permanent end to our lives on earth, it could be bad. Nagel uses this theme and goes on to give two possible arguments. In the first argument, Nagel explains that life is all we really have in the end and because death puts an end to our life, it must be our greatest loss in life. The second position he takes is that the person who actually dies will not experience any loss whether it is positive or negative because death will end that person’s life and their existence anyway. Nagel then goes on to examine whether or not death is an evil. He states that if death is in fact an evil, it has nothing to do with
The argument that Epicurus poses for what death is to us is “Death, therefore—the most dreadful of evils — is nothing to us, since while we exist, death is not present, and whenever death is present, we do not exist” (Epicurus). The conclusion that
World War I was also called as Great War. It was began on 28 July 1914 until 11 November 1918 centered in Europe. It was one of the deadliest conflicts in history because more than 9 million combatants and 7 million civilians died as a result of the war.It also made the changing of major political, including revolutions in many of the nations involved. The background of the war is political and military alliances, arms race and conflicts in the Balkans.
In society death has become a normal occurrence. Death has been portrayed in various ways throughout literature and life, it is often seen as a looming prowler, the greatest continuance of life or a general mystery. These common beliefs has started conversations about finality, closure, and endings. Even though, death and closure are universal realities of human existence. These endings can take many forms and teach many different lessons to those who remain. The death of a character in a work can: develop the story or exploit a theme. This concept is shown in numerous ways throughout literature, this is presented in To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, Antigone by Sophocles, Of Mic and Men by John Steinbeck and The Art of Racing in the rain
“All life is energy and energy cannot be destroyed but just transferred” was stated by Leo Simons. According to the Bible, John 11.25, “Jesus said to her, I am the resurrection and the life, whoever believes in me, though he die, yet he shall live”. Brian Keene said,” when you died, you were supposed to live on in the memories of others”. By quoting these people, one -can shed light on the different approaches to the belief – “life after death”. It is argued by scientists and rationalists that “life after death” has no logical rational. There is no truth in the statement. Philosophers and religious behaviours, on the other hand vehemently argue for the claim.
Everyone has to face death. There are some people who fear death because it will take them away from their loved ones and rip them off what they have earned throughout their life, such as money, honor, and power. However, there are people claiming that they do not fear death since they have experienced many wonderful moments in their lifetime. Death sounds so terrifying because it means an end of someone’s life. Reading Epicurus’ “Letter to Menoeceus”, I will argue that a reason to not fear death is that we do not exist anymore after we die.
Death is one of the only few human experiences that is absolute. Maybe the definitive nature of death is why there is so much folklore dedicated to giving people a life after death, to giving death logical quality. Heaven and hell, Hades and Osiris. Whole worlds, whole existences in fact, dedicated to giving meaning to death, to giving death- and consequently life- a purpose. But, try as they might, these philosophies remain only assumptions, because life and death violate any type of absolute philosophy offered to explain them. In his novel Candide, Voltaire parodies the motif of life and death by resurrecting characters to emphasize that existence defies Pangloss’s theory of radical optimism.